The entirety of the article is relevant for a few months at best. As for the negative connotation, it's certainly there, but it sure seems to me that it's mean

The entirety of the article is relevant for a few months at best. As for the negative connotation, it's certainly there, but it sure seems to me that it's meant to be taken facetiously, presumably made under the assumption that it's relatively unlikely to offend anyone. I would guess that a Venn diagram of people who read this blog (or follow news sites that would link an article on this blog), and people who hadn't heard of the Twitter hack, probably looks a lot like an illustration of Mars and the Sun, drawn to scale. There's always Scalzi's Law waiting in the wings when someone tries to be humorous on the Internet, but, considering that this particular formula doesn't have any clearly discernible minority group as its victim, or anything like that, I'm inclined to say it's safe to stick to HN's 3rd guideline on commenting here.